there were people outside of the government that did not like the conclusion that with the implicit conclusion diplomacy had worked if diplomacy had worked it might work again. and that. the tactic they adopted was not to attack the substance which they couldn't do because they hadn't seen it was classified except for the little summary and. because it became clear very quickly that the tradecraft initialing was good you couldn't say it was a sloppy is the iraq. so it became an ad homonym these evil incompetent individuals who oppose the president dashed this off with all to repurpose so given what you've said is this guy full featured whistleblower if i could call you that for someone to come forward with an opinion that's different

there was no political blowback. that on me not from within the government from outside of the government but. is that the. no members of congress read newspapers are affected by what their constituents read in the newspapers. one needs only to watch the. criticism of susan rice at the possibility of she would be announced of chuck hagel. that. is this is ludicrously unfair of course it is of course it is. but that's also part of the reality of living in a political environment so six years on g. think iran is still after a nuclear weapon in your opinion now the judgment that we made was that it was

a political decision to halt the weaponization portions of its program it continued to fizzle material fizzle material was the pacing element is that that the. at the time required to go from physical material to what. we did it was shorter than a dime fissile material. on it but they halted it. for. terminology we used was because of international scrutiny and pressure but that sense it was a political decision it was a matter of a technical problem. or a change in geo political situation they still lived in a tough neighborhood. that they could turn this program back on again at any time and we also said in that release part we weren't sure we would know if they turned it back on

a more about intelligence is the intelligence good enough today to ascertain whether iran actually does want see. a weapon or whether it has started well i've you know i'm outside of the. government and the access to that but. the. director of national intelligence must give an annual report to the congress it's called the worldwide threat assessment part of the budget process every year and there are both classified unclassified version of the report and the unclassified version of the report continued to reaffirm the judgments in the two thousand and seven estimate. that leads me to judge after all the years of experience since they can not say something different in public than it would say in a classified version that the. either there is no intelligence

to reverse that judgment or not not adequate diligence to reverse mint judge or the intelligence is there reaffirming. i don't know which it is but i know it comes out in the same place is this guy for this intelligence to be manipulated in any way for example using the case of iraq it was claimed it was trying to produce weapons of mass destruction that preys not to be tricked. is there a fear that each intelligence could be a many people i hate for a case against iran. no i really don't because the iraq there are a lot of things wrong with it iraq asked of it and my name is one of the ones on i was part representing the bureau of intelligence research we were the dissenters on the nuclear portion of it so there was not evidence of reconstituted nuclear program which was the only one that really mattered but there were there were many many flaws and problems in that estimate in the process has changed

in the years sensed two to fix that kind of problem there was not pressure there that led to any skewing there was interpretation. of what the intelligence said. by politicians that went beyond what the intelligence community judgments were example of the vice president. referring to the relationship between saddam and al qaeda. and the intelligence community he kept asking the cia which was the piece asked. for to look into this and they kept saying that no evidence. no conclusive evidence no persuasive evidence

and they asked many times he didn't say the intelligence community says there's a link he says the intelligence community has given me thirteen reports on saddam's connection with al qaeda and when he says that how did you feel you angry frustrated it's not a prudent thing for politicians to do because the intelligence community is presenting the same judgments to members of congress members of congress can ask do you agree with what. the answer would be i don't know specifically with no that's not the judgment of the intelligence community. so that i back to your original question i worried overly about politicisation about the deliberate distortion i'm not i think that.

the number of instances of political distortion of intelligence intelligence community caving into political pressure from people who have done this work recent books by paul pl or. joshua roven or both look at this and summers there's not very many examples in their decade sweep they've got basically the same examples and if my memory of both books is correct all of the examples are of the director of central intelligence not lower level it's at that level a position that straddles the boundary of the divide between analysts intelligence and policy makers the members of the national security they're supposed to be policy guys as well one of the last fourteen years we have seen to a large extent becoming an agent for us tonight that interventions from you can

slavia three to iraq libya and i'm ali do you feel that this sort of intervention is aiding the fight against terrorism mali though it's a lot of it is depicted in. counterterrorist terms and part of you know the u.s. and other support of the or mali an army i think that the. if there's any upsurge in terrorist activity directed at. the west in general because french now u.s. supported with the air airlift capacity it would be pretty small. well given what you said in the west's reaction is we're going to come in get the do you think that we're not going to see war interventions in the future i would doubt it i would doubt it that and i if i understand what president obama.

is the tempting to do. to. scale back u.s. involvement scale back the assumption that the u.s. is you know nine one one if you've got any problems. in the world. that we'll be less assertive in doing it. other developed countries. we. don't have the military capacity and it's a very much harder calculation in a totally interconnected world transparent world communications that dangers are going to come they're going to come internally and most of it to six i think the prevailing mood is if you try to help insiders.

conduct a revolution against a knock yourself or a terry and incompetent regime you take them you taint them and you taint yourself . so you. hope for the best sometimes provides missed and you come in after they've got. some motive come of success so that's my sense of the way the wind is blowing your trajectory of the world so i was thinking thank you very much for your time thank you for the questions and the time. do we speak your language anybody will or not a day of. school music programs and documentaries in spanish what matters to you breaking news a little tonnage of angles caden stories. you hear. detroit

all teach spanish find out more visit eye to eye all tito is calm. play.

and play. close eye. olympos. luckless. goodspeed. her. live whistler. sleepless. limitlessly good luck.

mum lists the mother and. her. son of a little. live. live live .